Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Links of Note

* Roger Berkowitz corrects misinterpretations of Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem

* Yu Hua discusses China's recent filial piety law.

* Thomas McDonald is doing a series on the history of Tarot cards; the first two posts in the series are already up:
Reclaiming Tarot
The Real History of Tarot

* J. K. Gayle looks at the terms in which Aristotle discusses arete, including the one surviving poem attributed to Aristotle (by Diogenes Laertius).

* Jon Cogburn has an interesting NewAPPS post on what he calls Collingwood paradoxicality: the phenomenon of it being widely acknowledged that someone is not sufficiently acknowledged.

* Paul Bartha's SEP article on analogical reasoning is quite good.

* Michael W. Dunne also has an SEP article on the fourteenth century scholastic, Richard FitzRalph.

* For five years the California prison system was sterilizing women inmates illegally. The laws governing tubal ligatures in a prison context are quite complex in order to eliminate the danger of women being pressured by officials to undergo the surgery; they seem to have been almost completely ignored.

* Scott Aikin has an interesting post on what he calls contested concept equivocation. Unless I am completely missing some subtlety of the concept/conception distinction, I don't think it's actually any form of equivocation, nor even an error of reasoning (it is not a reasoning error to insist on controversial claims about an idea, even without noting the controversy). But it is a rhetorical pattern that is quite common, and it would be nice to have it identified and named.

ADDED LATER

* The 153rd Philosophers' Carnival is up at "Philosophy on Philosophy"

2 comments:

  1. Thanks for the link. Not only did your post draw our attention to several very interesting noteworthy articles (including the later added Philosopher's Carnival) but it also brought us to your blog. I've not begun to read. Look forward to coming back here again and again. (And your reference to my post encouraged me to write a follow up. Note the dispute over Aristotle. Is he a poet? Or is his poetry philosophy? How can we "know"? Is it rhetoric? -- Aren't these very questions rhetorical questions? :) )

    ReplyDelete
  2. branemrys11:29 AM

    I'll definitely be reading your follow-up, then!

    ReplyDelete

No anonymity (but consistent pseudonyms allowed). Abusive comments, especially directed toward other commenters, will be deleted; abusive commenters will be hunted down and shot. By posting a comment you agree to these terms and conditions.

Please understand that this weblog runs on a third-party comment system, not on Blogger's comment system. If you have come by way of a mobile device and can see this message, you may have landed on the Blogger comment page; your comments will only be shown on this page and not on the page most people will see, and it is much more likely that your comment will be missed (although I do occasionally check to make sure that no comments are being overlooked).